mac5155 wrote:so, anyone know anywhere that still has AR-15s? I can't seem to find one..anywhere.

Neither can I. It’s actually rather impressive that people have basically “sold out” the entire country when it comes to semi-automatic centerfire rifles. If I were the management of one of the 100+ different entities that manufactures or assembles ARs, I would be scrambling to hire the extra workers necessary to operate 24/7. The same would go for anyone that manufactures standard-capacity magazines.

Last edited by Shyster on Thu Dec 20, 2012 3:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mac5155 wrote:I figured I could wait until Saturday since I don't have much time with work. I had my eye on a DPMS Oracle for $600. It's gone-zo.

Going to be for a while. Checking the gun genie at gallery of guns there looks to be absolutely nothing available on the AR platform.

It’s been like that for at least a couple days. I’ve put in my email address to be notified when a few different models come in, but who knows how long it might take. Also, I bet any stock that does come in will disappear about as fast as a carton of doughnuts tossed over the fence of a fat camp.

LGP’s gun owners may be interested in the following text. The following is the text of letters I will be sending tomorrow to all of my state and federal legislators. There are some individual changes; for example, the version that will go to Senator Casey acknowledges that he has already said that is willing to throw is NRA “A” rating out the window in order to vote for another assault-weapons ban. Also, not all of your legislators may have been approved by the Groups mentioned in paragraph 4. All of mine have been.

Casey's letter gets the alternate fourth paragraph that is also quoted below. You could also use some variant of that text for letters to ban-supporting folks.

If any of you want to use or adapt this text for your own letters or emails, please feel free to do so.

As one of your many constituents who is also a gun owner, I was as shocked and horrified as I am sure you were by the events of Friday, December 14. Many of us are still trying to come to terms with the magnitude of evil we saw on display. Our hearts go out to the people in Connecticut, and we hope their hearts and minds can heal from the losses inflicted by that madman.

But the politicization of this monstrous act and the accompanying scapegoating of lawful gun owners only makes this pain more difficult. Instead of grieving along with the nation, gun owners are being told we should surrender our rights. Pundits and politicians demonize us and say we should be ashamed of ourselves. They demand the return of laws that have already proven themselves to be ineffective at reducing crime. Some politicians are even demanding that we surrender our lawfully owned firearms. Right here in Pennsylvania, State Representative Steve Santarsiero (D-Bucks Co.) has promised to introduce a bill that would not only ban the purchase of what he calls “assault weapons,” it would also ban possession. A law of that type can only be enforced through forced confiscation.

I am writing to you today to ask that you oppose any efforts to restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners, and in particular any implementation of a law similar to the so-called Assault Weapons Ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004. We’ve had plenty of time to reflect on what that law did and did not accomplish, and by all counts it was a complete failure. Crime did not significantly decrease following the implementation of that law, and crime did not significantly increase following its 2004 sunset. The so-called assault weapons that were the subject of the law were—and still are—only used in a small percentage of crimes involving firearms. Neither did the restrictions on magazine capacity have any significant effect on crime. And contrary to what President Obama suggested in his press conference of December 19, the guns affected by that law were not “military” rifles. Semiautomatic pistols and rifles come in all shapes and sizes and are extremely common in the United States. They have been used by law-abiding citizens for more than a century for hunting, target shooting, self-defense, and other lawful purposes. The very term “assault weapon” was coined as an intentional effort to create confusion between semi-automatic rifles and fully-automatic machine guns, which have been strictly regulated for decades.

I know I am asking a lot. The pressure to cave in and accept gun bans and restrictions will be extreme. The media and anti-gun proponents like the Brady Campaign are howling for new laws and restrictions. But I am asking you to stand up. I know you have been supported by and approved by entities such as the National Rifle Association (of which I am a Life Member), Gun Owners of America, and Firearms Owners Against Crime. Speaking on behalf of the Pennsylvania gun owners who are your constituents, neighbors, and friends, we have supported you, and it is time for you to return the favor and support us. There will never be a better time for you to demonstrate that you are worthy of the endorsements we gave you. We will neither forgive nor forget if you fail to do so.

Gun owners like myself are willing to talk about solutions, and we see no problems with having an honest conversation about America’s problems with violence. But we want to see solutions that have a prayer of working. Gun bans, magazine restrictions, gun-free zones, and similar efforts are premised on a lie: that criminals and murderers will follow the rules. But criminals don’t follow the law. That’s why they’re criminals. Banning “assault weapons” and restricting magazines has already been demonstrated to have essentially no impact on violent crime, and new laws enforcing those restrictions will only serve to place more burdens on law-abiding people. They are not the solution. I ask you to stand in opposition to those who are trying to exploit this horrible tragedy in order to advance an agenda that will do nothing more than further burden those who already follow the law.

Respectfully yours,

[name]

Alternate text for Casey:

I am aware that you have already indicated your support for renewed bans and restrictions. I am reminding you that you were endorsed and supported by entities like the National Rifle Association (of which I am a Life Member) and Firearms Owners Against Crime. You have an “A” rating from the NRA. Speaking on behalf of the Pennsylvania gun owners who are your constituents, neighbors, and friends, we have supported you, and it is time for you to return the favor and support us. We will consider a vote for a new gun ban to be a betrayal of our trust. We will neither forgive nor forget if you do so. If you vote for another failed gun ban, I and many of your other constituents will make it our mission to make sure you are never again elected to office in Pennsylvania. I remind you that the passage of the last gun ban in 1994 is widely seen as one of the leading reasons your party was crushed in the 1994 elections and swept out of control of both houses of Congress.

Went to the shop today for an AR and ended up with a Taurus PT-740 for $385 out the door, with 2 clips. I think its going to replace my M&P9 as my primary carry weapon now. It's a tad more compact than the 9 and weighs considerably less, but only holds 6+1

Mac, please let us all know how that Taurus works out. I've run into people who seem to have strong opinions about their products, but not many seem to own any. I wouldn't mind picking up a couple of their revolvers, personally

Magazines seem to be every bit as sold out as many guns. just back-ordered about $300 worth of SIG P250 magazines for the full and subcompact sizes because that's one of the items highest on my wish list. It seems pretty pointless to buy a gun that can hold 17 rounds if we might be limited to only 10 rounds.

The demand for AR-type rifles is just nuts right now. Some ARs are floating in and out of stock on Davidson's Gallery of Guns, but it looks like you have to be quick. When I got up this morning, I was browsing their site and saw that they had 20 Mossberg MMR Tactical rifles in stock. I went into my kitchen and toasted and ate a bagel. When I got back to my computer, I refreshed the page and the number in stock dropped to 4. Those were gone in another 10 minutes. Stag Arms says that it has a year’s worth of back-orders. Wow.

For me it's the reasoning behind it - they want to prevent "carnage"... ok, great. I could go in with 2 6+1 pistols and 2 more clips, bam, im a half decent shot, I kill 13 people with 26 shots. Limiting a magazine size does nothing except increase reloading, which, if you've ever shot an AR, you know you can swap mags out in about 1.5 seconds. To me, it's a moot point.

redwill wrote:OK, I just did a test with my SR9c handgun. The loaded mag was in my shirt pocket. I took about 4 seconds to switch mags, rack the slide, and re-establish shooting position.

With an AR, whose magazine would not fit in my shirt pocket, I think, it would take longer -- in my estimation. I'd like to see a 1.5 second AR reload/repositioning.

You dont have to rack anything, when you put the mag in it does it automatically (for most style ARs). if not its just a matter of hitting the gun with an open palm. Depending on the receiver, the pmags will fall out cleanly, probably a lot cleaner than a pistol which the magazine is encased entirely in the gun and weighs considerably less. Of course this video isnt representative of Joe Schmo off the street but even with my limited AR shooting experience, I guarantee with a magazine belt I could change a pmag in >3 seconds.

Last edited by mac5155 on Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I agree with Mac. Swapping mags is fast and easy, and they really don’t take up much space. Someone bent on mayhem could just carry more magazines and swap them as needed. It’s a pointless restriction—a form of Security Theater. I do also think it’s a slippery slope. If we go down to 10 rounds, how long before the antigun folks start saying that we should drop down to five? Three? One? I’ve already seen people saying that we should ban any gun that doesn’t have to be reloaded by hand one cartridge at a time.

Also, for handguns where the grip itself contains the mag well, I think it’s stupid to have a gun sized for something like 17 rounds (like say a Glock 17 or SIG P250) being limited to a 10-round mag. Sixty percent of the mag will be a plastic spacer. You might as well either: (1) move to smaller guns sized around 10-round mags; or (2) switch to fatter cartridges, which are also more powerful, where you “give up” fewer rounds. Incidentally, both of those happened during the prior AWB, and those smaller guns actually helped the spread of concealed carry, which I’m sure is an effect that the antis neither foresaw nor wanted.

There were dozens of pages of discussion of this issue in the PDT. Look somewhere around page 1775.

Well, you figure your SR9 has a mostly plastic magazine, and probably weighs maybe 2 oz empty, and its sliding out of the grip. This one is sliding out of a 1/2 inch slot, weighs considerably more, and is easier to slap on the gun. Heck, even with a 4 round magazine, you could still do a ton of damage with an AR, which is why I think mag size is a stupid pointless limitation

say we do ban anything above ten rounds. then six months later somebody attacks a shopping center using two ten round mags taped together jungle style. now ten rounds is too much. we need to ban anything semi automatic.

after that someone shoots up a church service with pair of revolvers. now what? ban all handguns? what happens when a kid takes his dad's .22 rifle to school? i shot those in scouts.

mac5155 wrote:Well, you figure your SR9 has a mostly plastic magazine, and probably weighs maybe 2 oz empty, and its sliding out of the grip. This one is sliding out of a 1/2 inch slot, weighs considerably more, and is easier to slap on the gun. Heck, even with a 4 round magazine, you could still do a ton of damage with an AR, which is why I think mag size is a stupid pointless limitation

pittsoccer33 wrote:after that someone shoots up a church service with pair of revolvers. now what? ban all handguns? what happens when a kid takes his dad's .22 rifle to school? i shot those in scouts.

That's a good point. And revolvers can be reloaded faster than many people think. Check out these two gentlemen. I believe the first is using moon clips, and the second is using speedloaders.

Troy Industries is seriously ticked off at Dick’s Sporting Goods. Apparently, Troy entered into an exclusive agreement with Dick’s to sell those rifles, and Troy made a multi-million dollar investment to supply them. Dick’s not only didn’t tell Troy before it decided to stop selling MSRs, and Dick’s canceled all of the back-orders it took on those rifles without telling Troy. Press release here:

Shyster wrote:Troy Industries is seriously ticked off at Dick’s Sporting Goods. Apparently, Troy entered into an exclusive agreement with Dick’s to sell those rifles, and Troy made a multi-million dollar investment to supply them. Dick’s not only didn’t tell Troy before it decided to stop selling MSRs, and Dick’s canceled all of the back-orders it took on those rifles without telling Troy. Press release here:

Pretty sure Troy is setting themselves up to be able to charge a lot more than they charged at Dicks due to supply and demand. Like I said, they were selling them for $799 on black friday. Troy could get like $1500 a piece, if not more, for their ARs at the current moment.

mac5155 wrote:Well, you figure your SR9 has a mostly plastic magazine, and probably weighs maybe 2 oz empty, and its sliding out of the grip. This one is sliding out of a 1/2 inch slot, weighs considerably more, and is easier to slap on the gun. Heck, even with a 4 round magazine, you could still do a ton of damage with an AR, which is why I think mag size is a stupid pointless limitation